No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
This is a bit old now isn't it?
The problem is you had to re-apply it every two weeks or so. Useless.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Isn't is just the Albedo100 horse riding stuff with a different label?
You can get a better range of colours and its also much cheaper from riding shops as opposed to cycling shops
Last edited by Lee H; 11-06-2015 at 12:07 PM.
Does it improve the visibility from a truck cab in town traffic, is it more attractive to an SUV driver than his smartphone/pad, does it help drivers blinded by the sun to find their brake pedal... ?
Surprised by the negative reaction to this. It might not be perfect product, but unless there's malicious intent in ensuring it's less than perfect, isn't it at least a decent idea, a step towards something useful?
Surely this is along the lines of the reflective clothing everyone wears, although it has to be re-applied. If they perfected it, wouldn't it be a good thing?
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
We've already had steps towards something useful, they're called laws, the problem is that people just ignore those laws and they aren't policed, on the rare occasions when the law-breakers do get taken to court, too many get away lightly or even proven innocent.
Drivers walk free from court after killing cyclists because 'the sun got in my eyes' and after they were proven to have been texting or making calls within a minute or two before the fatal 'accident' happened. Those cyclists had reflectors/lights/reflective clothing, some white paint isn't going to cure bad/inattentive drivers nor is it going to stop those car driving jurors who set people free because they know that they could be that person in the dock.
If all drivers were attentive, respected the laws and other, esp. more vulnerable, road users, then yes, this paint might help further reduce the chances of collisions.
Really don't follow the logic here. You're right in everything you're saying about laws but what's that got to do with a company trying to produce a product that helps? Surely the same argument should then be used against makers of reflective clothing and other aids to visibility etc?
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
dbh (20-06-2015)
Nice idea but why not just have a range of road/commuter focused bikes with a similar yet permanent finish?
To be honest, as a driver nine times out of ten seeing the cyclist isn't the problem, most wear some sort of high visibility clothing and have lights and reflectors fitted to the bike. It's passing them safely when they're three abreast because they're under the impression that the A449 is part of this years Tour De France route, are occupying as much space on the road as a small hatchback on their own because they're weaving and wobbling about all over the place trying to get up a hill or trying to work out where exactly they intend to go based on their erratic behaviour and non-existant hand signals.
Note, I am aware I will not be popular for this or what I'm about to say next. This does not apply to ALL cyclists and may well not be a reasonable representation of the way members here ride. However it is an accurate representation of behaviour I see on roads of all sorts on a daily basis.
Seeing as the onus is clearly on me to avoid hitting them and that the government want to encourage cycling as a mode of transport, particularly in city centres. I think it's time that legislation went the other way a little bit and they should instate some form of mandatory test based around a basic level of proficiency and highway code knowledge.
I am aware that educational courses that cover similar ground exist but they aren't compulsory. Make it part of Secondary school education, form a governing body for it, I don't really mind how it's done but with so many cyclists on the roads and the responsibility for any accident that might befall them being squarely in my court I think it's time we expected a basic level of knowledge and ability from that group of road users.
After all, I can't go and buy myself a car and just take to the roads without a barrage of lessons, tests and there being certain expectations of my reaction times, vision and mental ability....
Visibility of the vast majority of cyclists isn't a problem, lights and reflectors are already a requirement and many riders go above and beyond that already; getting some drivers to pay full attention to the road and other road users is.
Yes, some groups of sporting riders can be an issue, esp. after their training ride or race. Seeing small groups of riders taking up as much road space as a 40 ton artic does lead to understandable frustration. If it's part of a race, there should be plenty of warnings posted along the route, there are here, so other road users should be prepared to cut them some slack.
Perhaps a better way of training road users would be to have everyone complete a few months riding a bicycle for say a hundred miles per week before allowing them to apply for any driving license?
Getting some drivers to pay attention to anything is a challenge. Many do forget everything they've learned a week after the license arrives in the post and that I cannot defend. They annoy me just as much as they annoy you, believe me!
As far as road races/charity rides go I'm all in favour IF they're organised and sign posted. Out of the countless groups I've encountered I can recall perhaps two, maybe three that were actually official events though and that's where I do start to get a bit frustrated with the ones that aren't.
Anyway, that's by the by and my original point still stands. There are thousands of road users out there using public highways every day who have never been tested in any way what so ever. They are required to have absolutely zero knowledge of the highway code and the way many of them ride displays that fact pretty clearly. Unfortunately those are the riders you remember over the responsible ones. In much the same way you remember a bad driver all day but forget about a good one two junctions later.
Now, I am aware of the limitations of a bicycle, as are most people, even though I no longer choose to ride for anything but recreation. So to me, putting yet more financial and academic pressure on learner drivers and adding to the litany of hurdles they need to overcome by throwing a bike test and ownership into the mix isn't the answer.
Not because it's unacceptable to me, I have my license now, that ship's sailed. Simply because yet again it shifts responsibility and leaves uneducated road users on the road.
For instance, under such a system I wouldn't have to go through that process if I just walked into Halfords and bought a bike, but I would have to go through that process to drive a car... So Joe Bloggs that's only ever ridden a bike still knows next to nothing and I with a drivers license am still expected to know everything and account for his behaviour.
That's why I mentioned secondary education. Weekly P.E is still a curriculum mainstay unless I'm very much mistaken and when I was at school that meant football, hurdles, badminton, squash... great recreational activites and they serve the purpose of at least trying to keep young people physically fit. However, I feel it would be a much better use of that time to ensure that students pass a cycling proficiency test. I know I'd have valued it more than the 100m hurdles and that's also the perfect age to start learning about the roads you bike to school on, the way things work and preparing for a driving test a few years down the line or equipping them with a decent amount of knowledge and awareness ready for commuting by bicycle to the job they'll (hopefully) end up with soon.
Much like horses and riders I do try and afford cyclists all the slack I can. I am aware that if they hit me it will be an annoying scratch in my paint and that if I hit them in anything but first gear I'm going to be the careless one feeling incredibly guilty and calling an ambulance. I know I command what is essentially two tonnes of rolling death and that if I'm not paying complete attention it could be the end of someone. Many cyclists however seem completely unaware that despite their lack of size, weight, momentum and speed they can cause just as big a hazard to other road users as I can and cause just as much loss of life for not being sensible about how they go about using the road network.
I'm not trying to go on a Clarkson anti-bike turn, not at all. I just don't think it's safe or sensible to have folks out there that don't know what they're doing and that I may one day have to take the responsibility for one of their mistakes.
Knoxville what about pedestrians? One of the largest group of people killed on the road are pedestrians. Should we make them get licenses too?
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
If they were walking on the main road all the time sharing space with cars, maybe.Originally Posted by TheAnimus
I remember taking a Cycling Proficiency course and test in primary school. I can still vividly remember parts of it, and I might even have the little pin-badge and certificate somewhere at home. More than nostalgia though, it did teach me about proper hand-signals, positioning on the road, and even ensured I could ride in a straight-line.
It cost nothing but a little time during primary school. You did have to have your own bike though, so anyone without one wouldn't have been able to do it.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
If only we could get cyclists to obey them.
Speaking as a cyclist/motorist/pedestrian who does.
And when every cyclist becomes proficient what will be the next plan for reducing cycling accidents and deaths? And what about kids getting bikes for Christmas and birthdays just like you probably did? Yes, we all know London is dangerous but there are still plenty of places for kids to ride safely - but they won't get a chance if there's a compulsory proficiency test.
Those in charge of motor vehicles are trained to look after the safety of other road users; perhaps their training needs to be made more effective? With lorries driving over people on a regular basis, I know which road user poses the greatest threat.
When they start walking in the middle of the road on a constant basis instead of using the pavement, yes. Why not, if we're going to be facetious about it.
Who says there would need to be a next plan? My plans are stunning and immune to failure... This is well known
I saved up a lot of pocket money for my rubbish Diamond Back copy actually but I see where you're coming from. There are still public parks, cycle routes, bridleways and a host of places children (or under my tyrannical regieme the unqualified) would be more than entitled to use for leisure or to learn how to ride a bike. After that, to use the bike on public roads they should have passed a cycling proficiency test or be accompanied by an adult that has passed theirs, in a similar fashion to the way we treat learner drivers.
Training for drivers could be more effective. I cannot and will not argue that fact because it could. Hazard perception tests should be administered in real world conditions not by sitting at a desk and pressing a space bar. More mechanical knowledge should be a must, as should understanding that forces at work when you're in control of a vehicle. Many modern cars hide their size and weight very well behind power assistance and driver aids and drivers should have a better understanding of what two and a half tons travelling at 60mph can and will do if those systems fail or malfunction or you fail to take road conditions into account. Motorway driving should also be part of a standard license, not a pass-plus or advanced driving scheme.
Could motorists be trained to deal with cyclists in a better fashion? Barring real world experience that we can only gain during lessons, maybe, maybe not. The guidelines I was taught are sound, getting people to follow them day in day out is another matter.
However, having cyclists behave predictably on the road is also key in my mind. It's key when doing anything on public roads. Behaving predictably lets other road users understand what you're doing and mitigates a lot of risks whether you're on foot, riding or driving. Many cyclists are untrained and behave very unpredictably which does not help at all. Some are fantastic and as I said, those are the ones you forget you had to pass five minutes later.
Adding consistency of education at least should be part of any attempt to reduce accidents and fatalities amongst that group of road users though. To heap more responsibility and training onto some to take into account the shortcomings of others is no long term solution to any problem. Road safety as a pedestrian is a key part of early primary education, to make cycling proficiency a key part of secondary education is a no brainer with so many benefits it's untrue. Especially in a world where we're told we should all be on bikes instead of in cars.
We educate pedestrians to the same level, what they do with that education is up to them. We educate drivers to the same level and in the same way what they do and don't put in to use every day is up to them and I can't and won't stick up for drivers that don't indicate or drive like idiots any more than I will cyclists who act like they're a law unto themselves. We don't educate all cyclists to the same level though. That to me is a weak link that needs to be addressed before you start changing anything else.
It makes me unpopular, but proper training and education for ALL should be key given the risks involved.
Galant (16-06-2015),Marenghi (16-06-2015),santa claus (17-06-2015)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
